Merkatz's page

I would advise against any character that has an anial companion to dump Charisma; one of your most important skills is Handle Animal. With only 1 rank in it at level 1, your handle Animal is only going to be a +2. You are going to have trouble getting your animal to do even tricks you have taught it.

Meh... Animal Companions all have "Link" which gives a +4 to that Handle Animal check. So even with that dumped Charisma, you still successfully "Handle" 85% of the time at first level, which will obviously get higher with level. I don't think it's a problem.

Tristan, I am comparing the proposal to the podcast change.

You say "extra reward," but that's an illusion. If I have to pay for a res, I am still out that cost. Delayed Credit just means I lose that money at 7th lvl instead of 4th... All because I took extra risk for the team, and I got no advantage for my troubles.

Merkatz wrote:

I'm still seeing 0 incentive in wanting to play up, even with the Delayed Credit option in play. I'm still taking an increased risk and I'm stil probably spending more money to play up, but still get no extra gold to compensate. Delayed Credit does nothing to change that (it just means pushing off losses to another date.

Your two playing up "options" just look like this to me: Play up and risk your PC to take a wealth hit (A) now or (B) later.

That is the point. There isn't supposed to be an incentive to play up. That is the goal of this entire discussion.

Then the only way I would play up is if I am "bullied" into doing so. And we a wanted to avoid that, remember?

I'm still seeing 0 incentive in wanting to play up, even with the Delayed Credit option in play. I'm still taking an increased risk and I'm still probably spending more money to play up, but still get no extra gold to compensate. Delayed Credit does nothing to change that (it just means pushing off losses to another date).

Your two playing up "options" just look like this to me: Play up and risk your PC to take a wealth hit (A) now or (B) later.

I don't understand the support for the "Delayed Reward" proposal. It seems like the illusion of a solution rather than actually solving anything. I mean what concerns that people had with the podcast change does it actually address?

-If I play down a few games will this let we recoup my losses later? No.
-If I would incur extra losses for playing up would I get anything extra to take care of that? No.

And heck, don't most people like building up characters and playing characters at higher levels? I know for a fact that I don't want to play extra scenarios at lower level and limit the number of times I can actually play my character at a lower level.

Not to mention, unless this "Delayed Reward" proposal 100% covers all GP and consumable expenditures made in the scenario I am going find myself in a worse off situation next week than I was this week (less gold and eq but same xp and pa...)

I'm just really not seeing what this does...

Hey! I'd definitely be up for an AP. We'd need to decide on which exact AP we would be playing before chargen though...

I'm up for most APs (especially the later ones), but I think Reign of Winter will have the most support since it is the new hotness. And if we go for Reign of Winter, I think I'd like to try out a Huntmaster Cavalier (multiple dog companions + winter environment = dogsled).

So how exactly do you plan on deciding which AP you are going to run?

There's always the option of going Beast Rider Cavalier. At 7th level they get the option to apply a unique Large template to any creature that is normally large, but isn't usually as an animal companion.

Of course, I still think Paizo dropped the ball by not putting out a large bear by default...

I have to agree with Turin. Aasimars were good option pre ARG, but now they just look completely delicious to me... True, they only work well in certain classes- but they can do some pretty ridiculous things that no others can do. If I am playing a class that needs either Charisma or Wisdom, it's hard to do better than Aasimar.

Enough people have already talked about the basic perks... But, I haven't seen anyone talk about Favored Class Bonuses at all. Adding 1/2 level to a single Bard performance or Oracle Revelation is absolutely amazing.

The primary benefit to Aasimar Bards is that they can exit the Bard class early while still having full progression in their main performance (leave vanilla Bard at 13 and still have swift action +4 Inspire Courage for example).

With Oracle, it's all about boosting up that one revelation that doesn't have any caps. Oracle of Life with 17d6 channel? Oracle of Battle that has a BAB of +30 for 1 type of CM. Get an additional +4 AC Armor options available to most Oracles (eg Ancestor's Spirit Shield caps at +16 AC for Aasimars).

Or in campaigns you know won't be going to 20, you can even go after those capped Revelations without worry. Oracle of Nature has a 20th level Animal Companion at 14th level. Blow a single feat for the Aasimar only Celestial Servant, and it now has the Celestial Template complete with Resist Acid, Cold, and Electricity 15, DR 10/evil, and once a day Smite for +16 damage. (Hell, Celestial Servant alone is why Aasimars make good Druids).

And Aasimar's just have cool stuff in general. They get a 3rd level SLA that is exceptionally useful (especially against stupid society modules) that can be easily augmented with a single feat (Heavenly Radiance). Who else can take a single feat to get high level SLAs?

--------------

As a side note, Lumiere do you really consider Resist Energy 5 to Acid, Cold, and Electricity to be useless by third level? Hell, I'd still be happy to take 5 less points of damage from a lightning bolt even at 10th level and beyond...

It's been like this for a while now, but the biggest problem I still have with the program is that a lot (most?) if the NPC's have quite a bit of gear missing from their blocks.

For all of the class archetypes in the UM book (including the entire Magus class as well), there are 21 points of FAQ/errata. 10 of those FAQ/errata are for the Synthesist.

I don't want to print out 2 tricking pages of rules clarifications just for one archetype...

Yeah, he keeps all those proficiencies as per RAW.

So hilariously enough, I cannot think of a single class or archetype that is proficient with more weapons then the Unarmed Fighter is. I think that was the real thing that Ravingdork was getting caught up on.

Hey! Welcome to town! I'm another Beavercreek local.

Honestly, the best way to meet gaming groups is to just go to the stores and see what you can find! But off the top of my head, here's what I know is going down around town:

Bookery Fantasy (Fairborn):
-Boardgaming every Sunday afternoon
-Sunday afternoon Skull and Shackles campaign that I think is looking for players

Epic Loot (Centerville)
-Boardgaming every Thursday and Saturday night
-Lots of RPGs popping up (I just joined a Burning Wheel group of youngsters last Friday, and saw a Shadowrun group get kicked off as well with a 4E group already running strong).

Bell, Book, and Comic (Dayton):
-Boardgaming every Friday night, and every other Tuesday night
-Pathfinder Society every other Wednesday night

Epic Loot is the newest store and has by far the best turn out for anything (they also have a huge wall of free to play games). Bookery Fantasy always has a solid Sunday crowd. Bell, Book, and Comic has somewhat become hit and miss. It looks like it's being more dominated by the MtG crowd over everything else.

Also check out the SOGG group (rpgers) and the Game-Day group (board gamers). Both of which are very active, and can give you more definite confirmations of dates and activities.

Best of luck, and hope to see you around.

Why are we delving into the idea of granting players another swift action? They just need to make some of the powers a 1/round free action or just as a part of another action.

Now there would still be the worry of using a bunch of different abilities in one turn, but they can just do like they did for the SA Rogue Talents. Put an asterisks next to the troublesome ones and just say you can't use more than one of those per round as a general rule. That sort of falls in line with what we have already without the need to add extra action types.

A monk gets to ignore prerequisites for a lot of feats but does that automatically make them a better class? Also, why is it such a deal breaker to get a feat five levels early? Unless it's the feat "I win", then it doesn't suddenly make one class better than another.

Actually, Monk is a fine example of a class that isn't good just because it gets a bunch of extra feats. However, in the right combination all those extra feats without prereqs can be quite ridiculous (see Zen Archer).

But why is getting something 5 levels earlier such a big deal to me? Because in my games that means I get to play with it about 6 months earlier. And if it is a good or fun feat that's a pretty big deal.

The thing is, I really, really want to like the Fighter. I love open chassis character types. And in all actuality, most of us don't have too big of a problem with the Fighter as is. Yeah more skill points and better saves would be nice. But what we really have a problem with is feats in general.

If they ease back on prereqs, scale feats better, breakup / improve certain chains, remove certain feats that should be always available to anyone, and give us some more feats with new and interesting options (not just +X to Y), then I could love playing the Fighter.

That's not too much to ask for, is it? XD

The most jarring thing I've noticed so far is a con artist that doesn't have bluff.

It's a bard with Versatile Performance (Act). He doesn't need to put ranks into the bluff skill.

Although I reall wish they would state this more clearly in stat blocks. Performance skill equivaencies are not something I'll ever memorize...

From most important to least:

• Person who brings snacks.
  
• Person who accurately keeps track of loot
  
• Person who can talk for party regardless of CHA score
  
• Person who can tell you what option is best for you and what book it is in
  
• Person who can keep track of the DM's plot and those silly subsystems
  

Okay, after my first time through, the thing that stands out the most is that aside from the PrC examples there is not a single multiclassed character in the book... That was pretty disappointing to me.

Now I know space is limited, but instead of spending 25 pages on the iconics (which are already available for free), you could have let the developers get creative with that space and make some NPCs without any class restrictions.

Yeah, I really don't like feats being the main feature of a class. Too many feats are just boring static bonuses or are meant to modify actual class abilities (of which the fighter has none). And most of the interesting feats are stuck behind annoying prereqs (eg most manuever feats) or obnoxious chains (eg Whirlwind Attack). It doesn't help the fact that there is a strong need to reinvest in feats to stay relevant (eg vital strike), or have feats with higher and higher prereqs but with diminishing returns (eg TWF). And this compounded by the fact that a fighter is almost forced to select certain feats once he gets into higher levels (eg Iron Will).

Now add that to the fact that there are many, many ways for other classes to use feats more efficiently than fighters (through early access, ignoring prereqs, or having modified abilities) on top of there other abilities.

Lemmy had a good example: A Battle Oracle who takes Extra Revelation: Weapon Mastery gets three feats for the price of one...

Rangers are another one... Archery Rangers can get Imp Precise Strike 5 levels early. Mounted Rangers can get the fearsome Mounted Skirmisher feat 4 levels early and without needing Trick Riding first. Two handed weapon Rangers can pick up Great Cleave without needing regular Cleave first.

I ask myself "Why would I ever play a fighter?" And I find that I have no answer.

Actually, I really like the idea of just throwing out some more regular/mythic feats that requires a decent Str prerequisite. I can't think of a single PC feat that requires more than Str 13- whereas I can think of at least a dozen Dex feats... That's part of the problem.

A good start would be making mythic power attack require Str 17 or something. Or how about a mythic feat that lets you wield oversize weapons without penalty (ie human wielding large greatsword)?

But then, lets not make everything be about damage for Str... The ability to apply certain conditions or do combat maneuvers as a part of a regular attack (ie still doing the damage) could be one possibility.

And the point still remains that Dex builds are using resources to catch up to Str builds and Str builds can close the gap on the normal Dex advantages with a lot of mythic options (many of which are free).

You mean they gave wizards a mythic feat that is still less than paragon surge?

No, not the feat. The base ability for Archmages called Wild Arcana. And it is much better than Paragon Surge. Paragon Surge requires you to use a spell and a round to set it up to get a specific spell for a short duration. And the spells you cast still come out of your available slots. Wild Arcana lets you use Mythic Power at will to cast any spell your class could let you without expending spell slots. Welcome to +15 additional 9th levels spells that the wizard can spontaneously cast at 20th level- just from one level of Mythic.

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

But back to Mythic Finesse:
Well the feat is incorrectly and poorly worded at best. But i think so long as it doesn't do 1.5 damage with two handlers its fine.

And let's be fair, while Dex is a god stat in the regular game, there are a lot of little abilities in Mythic that make Dex far less necessary.

Inititiative bonus? Everyone gets a +20 at Myth 2.

Reflex Saves? Its the least important save. You can always burn Mythic Power after the fact if it is critically important. And there are other Myth features that can help make such thing irrelevant (heck everyone gets a version of improved evasion, but it works for all saves, except those from mythic spells at tier 5).

AC? Mythic offers a few ways to get DR, a couple ways to flat out ignore damage, and quite a few ways to get some AC bumps (mythic combat expertise gives you a +3 to +8 Dodge bonus at no penalty for 10 rounds at the cost of 1 Mythic Power for instance).

So what martial characters would choose Str over Dex? Those who don't want to be terrible in early levels before Mythic comes into play and those want to explore more interesting options in Mythic without having a delayed progression because you need a certain feat and some paths abilities to max out Dex properly (after all, tiers are supposed to take longer to obtain than normal levels).

Oh no Dex to damage!!!! Of course it's more powerful than Dervish Dance. This is a Mythic feat, it's supposed to be better.

And as far as Mythic goes, it's still not that powerful in comparison to other things.

A 5th level Wizard with 20 Int who gets 1 Tier of Archmage, selects Wild Arcana and can now choose to spontaneously cast any Wizard spell 3rd level or lower 5 times per day without any preparation.

For those of you keeping track at home, that Wizard can choose from around 500 spells to cast from as needed. And that only get's much worse as the Wizard levels (he doesn't need any more Mythic Tiers). Schrodinger's Wizard is now an actual reality.

Honestly, having flaws doesn't bother me at all. I think some need to be changed a little bit to make everything working, but that's it.

However, what would be lost if we make flaws optional? What is gained by making flaws mandatory?

I can't think of any reason why they shouldn't just be optional.

Yeah, I think School Aversion is by far the worst choice as a Mythic Flaw.

-4 Against all saves AND effects lasting twice as long against you is bad enough. But no benefit from spells (or effects) from that school? That's brutal.

Transmutation isn't used offensively? Enjoy never benefiting from Feather Fall, Expeditious Retreat, Haste, Fly (and similar flight abilities), all the good polymorph effects, Time Stop, and a bunch of other common buffs.

And oh god, could you imagine taking School Aversion: Conjuration? How would you heal???

Hey Jason, just curious to see what you think would be the best way to handle WBL for Mythic Tiers.

EG If we were playing something written for 15th level characters, would you recommend everyone starting with 15th level average wealth?

Or would the character that is 10/5M start with just average wealth for a 10th level character? Then the character at 13/2M have 13th level wealth and the normal 15th level character be the only one with 15th level wealth.

Or what if it was just everyone at 10/5M. Should they go against challenges build for APL 15 with 10th or 15th level wealth?

Or are you hoping for all different kinds of mixes?

Edit: Big Ninja...

Actually, Mort, I did find a CR requirement. It's on Page 35 in the GM section. I think the reason I missed it before (and probably other people) is because it talks about those CR guidelines for Lesser Trials under a subheading labeled Greater Trials.

It says that you can normally only accomplish a Lesser Trial when up against a creature with an adjusted CR equal to your adjusted level. Or possibly a group with a CR each 1 or 2 lower. However, that doesn't change how easy some of the skill challenges are.

____________________________________

However, I think one of the biggest problems is that there are only 13 presented examples of Lesser Trials available to each path. However, a character progressing all the way to Tier 10 needs to accomplish 55 Lesser Trials. Repeating trials over and over again becomes decisively less and less mythic to me. Yes James, creating a throw away Intelligent Item isn't very Mythic, but unless the DM creates 50 more Lesser Trials available for each path, you are going to be repeating trials. I begin to get less interested in how awesome it is to create an Intelligent Item when it's the sixth one I've had to make.

____________________________________

And Veiled Nail, yes a lot of us will know what something "Mythic" looks like when we see it, but the problem is that you have to declare what your Trial is before you achieve it. You preform some amazing stunt against all the odds to save the day? Congrats. Here's a Mystic Power Point. Now go cast three random spells off scrolls because that's what you said you would do to show off to the world!

Okay, sounds good.

Thanks Jason.

I'm seeing this in a couple of places, but here is one example:

Iron Will (Mythic)
Your will is incorruptible.
Prerequisite: Iron Will, 3rd mythic tier.
Benefit: Whenever you roll a Will saving throw against a spell, spell-like ability, or special ability from a nonmythic source, you may roll twice and take the best result.

Does anything with a Mythic Tier or Mythic Rank count as a mythic source? EG if a Mythic Wizard casts a normal Dominate Person, would Iron Will (Mythic) apply?

Or would this just apply to those specific Mythic Spells or regular spells that have been modified in some way with Mythic Power?

I am curious, because if everything a Mythic character does counts as Mythic, how do some of these feats/abilities work in higher Myth/Level games? If I am playing as a 15 level character with 7 Myth Tiers, how many things am I fighting with absolutely no Myth levels? If the answer to that question is "almost none" then would things like Iron Will (Mythic) become completely useless?

However, the player does have to declare the trial before he attempts it in order for it to count for Mythic progression.

So the point remains. Players still know what trials they have to complete, so that incentive to be selfish over working as a team is still there.

You think Dependency is the easiest flaw?

How about Weapon Weakness (Siege Engine)? When was the last time you were attacked by one of those?

Okay, so a little bit of hyperbole, but there seems to be a heck of a lot of abilities using Swift (or Immediate) Actions in this playtest.

That's great for a classes like Fighter who really don't have any use for swift actions, but it seems like Bard and Inquistor who already struggle with their number of swift action abilities are getting the shaft.

I played an Arcane Duelist that already needed swift actions for Performance, Arcane Strike, and quite a few spells (the finale and inspiration line of spells for instance). The obvious path for bard is Marshal, yet every single Marshal's Order requires a swift action, Mythic Power requires a swift action, and a lot of the path abilities require swift actions.

Would it be that terribly overpower to change at least some of these to 1/round free actions?

I really have to agree. Since you have to declare what trials you are attempting to accomplish, the whole thing seems less epic and more metagamey.

I can just see the bard now yelling, "Wait, don't kill them yet! I still need to perform one more round to get my Performance Victory!"

Or Guardians yelling at people to run away or fight defensively because the battle is almost over and no one has taken damage yet, because that's what he needs for Behind Me!

There is also some of these Trials are ridiculously easy to accomplish.

Perfect Craft? A single DC 16 Spellcraft check to make a CL 1 item, and you got it (12.5 gold for CL 1 scrolls anyone?)

I can also see legions of high level mystic characters taking walks in the woods to make knowledge checks about bunnies, squirrels, birds and other low level creatures until they roll high on their knowledge check to show off their Skill Supremacy.

The Trickster will also accompany those characters on their nature walks. Kill a single bunny in one shot to show off your Assassinate skills.

Definitely interested in this. I'm thinking Scout Rogue, but obviously I want to see the playtest document before I make too many decisions.

I guess I didn't get my points across very well. I don't just want mechanical benefits, ignoring all flavor. Not at all. The idea behind general traits is that if the players want them, they have to provide the flavor that justifies it.

This brings up something that I consider one of the most important features of traits: many do the exact same thing mechanically.

For example: In the APG the Bully (Social) and the Brute (Half-orc Racial) traits are mechanically exactly the same. But the fluff connected to each is different.

See, I consider this to be the worst feature of traits. There are 101 ways for someone to have a background that would justify giving them a +1 to intimidate and making it a class skill, agreed? However, I don't think any of us want paizo to be printing 101 traits for intimidate and then 101 more for every other skill.

Instead, if we follow my generalized trait idea, players can say that they are intimidating because their father was a lawman who taught them some interrogation techniques. Or maybe they horribly scarred their face in some accident/battle and now have a very fearsome appearance. Or they can provide one of dozens of other reasons, and then I can probe deeper or offer suggestions to make it better if I so desire. The point is that players are using the fluff they want with a benefit that makes sense.

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

The other benefit to consolidating traits is that since there is no need to reprint mechanically identical traits, energy could be spent on developing some specific traits with specific requirements and unique benefits. Ideally, these specific traits would be more than some generic bonus, but instead offer a benefit that could occasionally shine through and visibly show the character's background.

For example, the Acadamae in Korvosa is a famed wizarding college that specializes in summoning. A trait saying you attended this specific school shouldn't give you generic +1 to Kn Arcana or whatever. That's boring. There's thousands of ways to get better at Kn Arcana. But maybe the prominent Acadamae has some unique tricks that deal with summoning that is difficult to pick up elsewhere. Instead, granting a specific summoning bonus would be more fitting, like say allowing all summons to stay out an additional 1 or 2 rounds. Or for something more interesting, how about 1/day letting a former student of the Acadamae roll twice when determining the number of creatures being summoned and take the better result. Now that's a flavorful bonus, and players around the table can see that you have some unique skills at summoning because you are an Acadamae student.

Flavor is important. But I like flavor and mechanics to make sense and both still be interesting. Make all the traits that offer generic bonuses generic themselves, and then focus on making traits that have special flavor and special mechanics.

Merkatz wrote:

Jiggy wrote:

No.

The modifiers to which you are referring are for when YOU are invisible, not when one part of what you're doing is invisible. Huge difference.

That doesn't really seem like a huge difference to me. The target can't see how it is being disarmed/stolen from. Are you saying they don't have any penalties for that? Because that doesn't make any sense to me.

They can see you pointing at them and casting a spell, so they'd be on guard for something to happen to them. They're not flat-footed.

Pilfering Hand only has a Somatic component requirement, and that doesn't require you to "point at them." So the BSF is on guard in the middle of combat against a force he can't see taking away his weapon just because a cleric waved his arm 50 feet away? What if it was a stilled spell? Would he still be on guard then?

Also, can I use the same argument against every Ninja with Vanishing Trick after he goes invisible in the middle of combat? I certainly would be "on guard" against an attack from him. Do I keep my Dex as well?

No.

The modifiers to which you are referring are for when YOU are invisible, not when one part of what you're doing is invisible. Huge difference.

That doesn't really seem like a huge difference to me. The target can't see how it is being disarmed/stolen from. Are you saying they don't have any penalties for that? Because that doesn't make any sense to me.

I actually like Pilfering Hand for my casting Clerics. If I know I am going up against Humanoid opponents, I will prep one or two of them.

Especially since I don't have access to things like Pyrotechnics, Web, or even the nerfed Glitterdust.

A key thing about Pilfering Hand is that unlike other spells that perform CMs (eg Chain of Perdition), Pilfering Hand says that it is an invisible force. That means +2 on that CMB check, and the target is denied their DEX (and some other) bonus to CMD. This can be a pretty debilitating spell with a rather good success rate against DEX based characters (eg archers).

But, I wouldn't go so far as to say it is OP.

Merkatz wrote:

Only Humans can be Aspiring Bards.

To be fair, this one is technically v3.5 material from Taldor: Echos of Glory and was originally restricted to not only humans, but Taldans. I suspect the Kitharodian Academy and the Rhapsodic College are uptight about non-humans attending. THAT's why a lot of the traits are so restricted, because they're from supplements geared to a specific setting/location.

When I check the SRD for this trait, it's listed as FAN CONVERTED material (removing the restriction of Taldan).

And to be fair, it is still PFS legal and D20PFSRD has been making a bunch of mistakes on labeling traits (there are a bunch of APG traits labeled as FAN CONVERTED for instance).

Okay, lets say I buy the story about Taldorans being racists and can only let Humans into their Bardic Academies. Taldor is not the only place in the world with Bard Colleges. But this flavorful trait with a useful bonus to me is out of my reach because I live in Cheliax, and wandered around the Bard Colleges in Westcrown. Too bad they didn't reprint an Aspiring Bard trait in the Cheliax guide. Guess I am SOL.

That's the problem with traits. They don't cover every instance, they cover super specific instances. There are dozens of Bard Colleges all over Golarion, and the bonus is a very generic one. However, only Taldoran Humans can be Aspiring Bards. No one else.

MendedWall12 wrote:

I am sorry you feel that way. Many of my players love hunting through the traits for something that not only fits their character concept but also provides that nice flavorful, and mechanical bonus for them. They treat it like a little treasure hunt. When you find the trait that works well with your concept it feels great. Also, I've seen players design entire character concepts off of a trait (meaning they saw a cool trait they designed their character knowing they wanted him/her to have it).

This. Generic is like picking a feat.

Traits are designed to provide a background hook or story element as well as an in-game mechanic.
If a player really wants a trait for fluff but doesn't qualify, I'd be happy to bend but they need to explain why that is not "I want that bonus"...

But too many traits have super specific details and requirements, only to give an extremely general mechanic. And if I am not taking a trait because "I want that bonus," why take traits at all? If it's just fluff with no benefit, I can already make that up without needing any rules for it.

However, I do agree that traits should be good for a background hook or story element. So if you let your players take one of those generic traits, have them explain why that works. I mean, if you already let your players re-fluff and ignore prereq's, what is the difference between that and having a couple generic feats, making them fill in the blanks?

When traits were first introduced in the APG, I was pretty excited about them. They seemed like nifty little customizations that could could give you a small boost in power while giving some nice flavor at the same time.

However, as more and more traits have been coming out, I have become more and more disappointed, until the point that I've actually really began to hate them. Although, Campaign Traits have been somewhat better.

The biggest problem with traits are the artificial requirements and restrictions put on them.

Only Humans can be Aspiring Bards.
Only people from the River Kingdom could have been Bandits.
Only worshipers of Cayden can be Good Natured.

It's completely asinine. Seriously, it's like one department comes up with a good trait, and then another department randomly picks 1-3 requirements from out of a hat. And it really frustrates me that like 10 new traits are added every month, but I never even consider using 9 of those. So when I slog through a few hundred traits, trying to find anything that fits my concept and actually does something remotely useful, I usually end up disappointed. So I wind up falling back on the handful of most useful and most open traits (eg Resilient and Reactionary) once again, and wonder why I bothered.
___________________________________________________________________________ _____________________

I honestly wish Paizo had done something like this instead:

Skilled Background: Pick 1 skill. Get a +1 trait bonus on that skill and always treat it as a class skill.

Resilient Background: Get a +1 trait bonus on one of Fortitude, Reflex, or Willpower saving throws.

Native Weapon: You gain proficiency in one weapon, depending on your homeland. *Big list of locations/weapons (eg Brevoy- Aldori Dueling Sword; Tian Xia- Katana; Qadira- Scimitar, etc...)

Hometown: Pick 1 city where you grew up. You get a +2 trait bonus on Kn. Local and Kn. History checks about this city, as well as a +2 trait bonus on Diplomacy checks made to Gather Information while within the city. You can make such checks untrained.

Do a few more big sweeping general traits like these, then you can have the rest of the traits introduced be unique, flavorful, and actually have sensible requirements.

For example, Aasimar's could have traits that give them DR 1 or 2/Evil, the ability to bypass 5 points of /Good DR, or how about the ability to intensify their Daylight SLA (say it can be Widened, but only works 1 min/level instead of 10)?

How about a Favored Lineage trait where Half-X's can use the Favored Class Bonuses of one of their parents?

The possibilities are endless, but they just need the fluff requirements to match the actual mechanics (and the mechanics can't be worthless, either). Am I the only one who really feels this way about traits?

1. I'd rather have an NPC writeup that you can uses as-is without an animal companion, and have the option to swap in an animal companion (even if it's not built to optimize that setup), than have an NPC writeup that requires you to use an animal companion, and becomes much less powerful if you swap in a domain instead because several of the character's feats and spells now do nothing because they're meant to be used with a (now nonexistant) animal companion.

I have to say that I find this to be rather disappointing as well. While I applaud the idea of trying to make each NPC as useful in as many situations as possible, I feel that this makes the book suffer in versatility on the whole.

With 300+ NPCs, having a few specialized concepts is expected, as well as actually desired. And its not like a Druid that focuses heavily on buffing his AC is a radical fringe idea. I really doubt that anyone would have complained if 5 of the characters in this book relied heavily on ACs (well, except for people wanting even more examples of this).

But, now I am curious about what other common ideas are going to be completely missing in the book for the sake every single build being as individually useable in as many situations as possible. :/

A couple of other suggestions:

1. He now radiates Evil as a Demon of his HD. This doesn't have any affects on things like Smite Evil, but it will set off alignment based traps and divination. This could have large repercussions if your characters interact somewhat often with good aligned clergy. Also, Demons (and Demons only) can recognize the character for what he is.

2. When the character gets down to HD or lower hit points (ie only those hit points he was able to obtain with that inherent +1 Con), some part of the demonic energy that is within him tries to take over. Maybe have him under a confusion like effect for as long as he is like this +1d4 rounds afterwards. But, I'd change the confusion rules to this- 1-25: act normally, 26-50: do nothing, 51-75: attack nearest living thing, 76-100: cause as much rampant destruction as possible. Also, they don't have the caveat of having to attack whatever last attacked them instead of rolling.

I just find Fighters to be plain boring to play from level 1. If I can start playing a Fighter at 10+ it's not as bad, but that's never an option for me. There are quite a few reasons for that, but they all go back to the idea of feats just not being good enough to be your primary feature.

1. The overwhelming majority of feats don't grant you any new ability. So many are "get +X to this", "use that Y more times per day," or "take less penalties for doing Z." Those are pretty boring imo. A +2 to Wil is pretty much necessary for a Fighter, when do I take that boring level for instance? However, this has gotten a little better with things like the ARG race feats and things like Eldrich Heritage.

2. There are too many feats that shouldn't be a feat. Unseat and Strike Back are two big examples of this. Along the same vein, there are too many feats that are limited in what they can be combined with. Things like not being able to Vital Strike and charge or not being able to use Stand Still with a reach weapon is frustrating, and limiting.

3. Feats don't scale well. Diminishing returns from feats like TWF, feats that require reinvestment to stay relevant (Vital Strike), or abilities that require lots of feats, but become worthless later on (Trip) are issues.

4. Stupid prerequisites and annoying feat chains. This is probably the biggest reason why I hate having feats as the major class feature. I mean, Whirlwind is a really cool option, but its got all that garbage in front of it. Now they aren't all terrible feats, but a lot of times those prerequisites aren't anything that I want or even need. If I am playing a Fighter, it may take me 6 months to get all the way to the end of the Whirlwind chain. And what other interesting things am I getting from the Fighter while I am leveling towards my goal? Boring static bonuses and abilities that run counter to how I am trying to build.

Yes, Fighters get a ton of Feats, but when I have to pay taxes to get stuff I want, it doesn't feel any different than having 8 "dead levels". Magic users add insult to injury. Not only can they cherry pick their spells, but they can cherry pick their feats. Can anyone deny that Metamagic and Crafting Feats are extremely powerful? Yet, almost all of those just have caster level prereqs, if that. That's pretty much the case for all of their feats...

Well, there is a couple of problems with that Killstring.

1. To buff your gun takes spells, and to be most effective you need to be firing spells. The Spellslinger has less spell slots and a lot less available spell options than normal. You also have 0 class features to fall back on (no cantrips and no school powers that grants anything from simple blasts to teleportation and invisibility SLAs). Utility spells are going to be hard to come by, especially in early levels.

2. You want to be the "archer" character but you have terrible BAB and terrible HP and will be focusing on a weapon that has a terrible range increment. You need to target touch AC. That means 20 feet for pistols, or 40 feet with rifles. And if you go the rifle route you can only fire a shot once every other round, even with rapid reload. If you are already spending your limited spells on buffing your gun and blasting and trying to have some utility, how much do you have left for making yourself not get squished by things bigger than you?

3. When you run out of spells to fire, your damage will be crap. 1/2 BAB means you still might be missing on even touch attacks. And you will be at 1/2 the progression for all the good shooting feats.

Channel Smite is a fine feat. Yeah, Quick Channel + Selective Channel is better in every way. For Positive Energy users.

Have you ever played a Negative Energy Channeler in a party of 6, with 1 cohort, and animal companion, and everyone is mounted? I have. And let me tell you, Channel Smite looks a hell of a lot more attractive than Quick+Selective in that case.

And sure, Rogues may be able to do 35 damage from sneak attack on a couple of attacks a round- but sneak attack is like 80% of a Rogue's damage. A buffed battle Cleric at the same level is probably getting comparable damage from two hand power attacking. And if the Cleric/Rogue would have to move, and thus only get 1 attack in the round, what is better? 35 damage (plus weapon damage) or 70 damage (plus weapon damage)?

However, I will say that having Channel Smite be a prereq for Guided Hand is just a stupid feat tax, because many of the builds that could have a use for Guided Hand will have absolutely no use for Channel Smite.

It is a terribly designed class.

It's not just 4 opposition schools.

You also lose cantrips. And you lose an addition spell at each level. And you lose out on some awesome school powers.

I'm mean, here's the problem: Yes, you can crank out some really awesome DCs on certain spells, but you are a one trick pony with very little ammo. You are extremely limited on the number of spells you can cast. 1/2 the Wizard spells in the game will take two slots for you. Detect Magic takes a first level slots from you (likely two because you'll ban Divination). You lost out on your bonus spells from any School. Yet, in order to beef up your gun you need to put spells into it each combat. How many spells will you be left with, especially at lower levels? And you will never be able to do a lot of the even most basic things that people expect Wizards to do (ie consistently ID magic items). And if you ever roll a 1 on an attack roll, your gun (and thus your one trick) is broken, and will take 1 hour to get back in order.

Hilariously enough, there is a way to make this class work: Take 1 level of Spellslinger, then 19 levels in any other full caster (you'd want to start with levels in the other caster class first). It's better in every single way. You'll get cantrips back. You'll get more open spell access. And you'll get cool features. And you loose absolutely nothing from multiclassing (except for bonus feats at 5/10/15/20). The Spellslinger removed everything the Wizard had that scaled with levels, and gave you all its new features at first level.

Actually, A Spellslinger 1 / Witch X wouldn't be a bad build at all.

You blend your knowledge of foes and your shapeshifting abilities together.

Prerequisitites: Favored enemy class feature, wild shape class feature.
Benefit: Your levels of druid stack with your ranger levels for determining when you select your next favored enemy. Also, your ranger levels stack with your druid levels in determining the number of times per day you can use your wild shape class feature, up to a maximum of eight times per day.

1 Ranger level + 1 Feat grants a Druid a full Favored Enemy progression? Combine that with a 15k Wand of Instant Enemy at higher levels, and the Druid becomes more of monster than it ever was before...

Taking Chris's idea even further:

The Honor Guard Archetype not only gives you the improved Bodyguard feat, it also let's you declare an ally as your "ward" when you make a challenge (you lose -1 AC, they get +1 Dodge AC when adjacent).

And if you hit 8th level as an Order of the Dragon Cavalier, that aid another bonus increases by another +1 (and +1 more at 14 and 20).

Also, in the Ultimate Equipment guide, a new armor enchantment called "Benevolent" was added. For a mere 2,000gp, you now add your armor's enhancement bonus to all aid another actions to increase AC (and it doesn't decrease your AC or anything else harmful).

And for giggles, you could always take something like Saving Shield (immediate action +2 shield bonus) or In Harm's Way (immediate action to take a hit for someone).

So if you ended up with 14 levels of Cavalier (plus X Fighter levels), and +5 Benevolent armor, you'd be looking at AC bonus of +3 (luck) to all adjacent allies, the ability to make AoOs to add an addtional +13 (untyped), the option to grant your ward +1 (dodge) during a challenge, and using saving shield as an immediate action 1/round for another +2 (shield).

Adjacent allies are getting:
+3 always
+16 against many attacks
+17 if they are your ward
+19 if they are your ward and you are using Saving Shield on them.

Doubling Con really shouldn't make that much of a difference. It should still be extremely hard for your NPCs to accidentally kill your PCs.

Taking your example at 15 nonlethal damage (the max he could have and still be conscious), it would still take another 25 points of nonlethal damage to kill him. That is the same amount of lethal damage it would take to outright kill this character, even at full health. So unless you are throwing up grossly overpowered opposition at your PCs, this really shouldn't happen.

Not to mention that as you level up, Con is going to becomes even less of an important factor. A PC with 100 HP, and 20 Con can take 220 nonlethal damage instead of 240 if Con was also doubled, and would require at least 120 points of nonlethal damage from a single hit to take a character from conscious to dead.

So what were you throwing at your party that should have TPK'd them with nonlethal damage? I mean the only thing that really does that kind of nonlethal damage are those grossly spec'd sap masters.

I'm also having the *real* reason that Harrigan was sending the ship back to Port Peril be so that he could relay a message to his Chelish handlers. Mr. Plugg will be carrying a scroll on his person, protected by some ** spoiler omitted **

Unfortunately for Harrigan and the Chels, Plugg is secretly a worshipper of Mammon, and decided that he'd rather go into the pirate business for himself rather than serve in the invasion plot.

I hope to have my players keep wondering, "What was in that exploding note?" for most of the rest of the AP. :)

I did the same thing, except instead of being a worshipper of Mammon, I've had Plugg come across some information about Wolf's Treasure in Mancatcher Cove, and is going to be taking this opportunity to search it out for himself.

More specifically, Plugg knows the location of Mancatcher Cove, and has recently obtained a written copy of the five line verse that was originally supposed to be on Inkskin Isabella's back. Isabella's back only has the location of the island imprinted on it, and she is desperately searching for clues for the specific location of the treasure. The whole Sahuagin element has been removed (reserved to make a potential interesting encounter if the party braves known Sahuagin invested waters, such as south of Shark Island or Desperation Bay near Eleder). The canopy creeper and the ancient mariner remain to guard the treasure.

In my game, Plugg was killed without giving up the location, and the PCs got the verse, knowing it was a link to a treasure, but not knowing where to begin the search. After they spend some time subtly asking around, they come to the conclusion that it may have something to do with the famous Captain Wolfe. However, this information tips off Isabella to the fact that the PCs may have a clue to the treasure.

In an attempt to find the verse, Isabella infiltrates the PCs crew (easy for me to do as the GM, since I have been giving them interesting crew mates here and there with miscellaneous specialties and bonuses). Obviously she covers her tattoos, and for metagaming sake, she wears her hair in a ponytail and goes by a different name (my players have seen the front cover of this module after all...). She wishes to get the information, and leave the ship with the PCs none the wiser, but during a time when the PCs are away, an important NPC (like Kroop or Sandra) catches her off-guard, and sees the tattoo to Mancatcher Cove. She charms the NPC to interrogate them about the treasure verse. When she is done, she blasts the NPC, leaving them for dead, and flees to her ship.

When the PCs return, they find a barely alive NPC who is able to tell them what happened, and can even direct them roughly towards the direction of Mancatcher Cove. Now its a race towards the Cove, with a final showdown happening on the isle itself, with the canopy creeper and ancient mariner acting as wild cards however I need them.

I just noticed i was missin a couple of point in my stats due to high level

Updated char

Mirella Stormdragon

The biggest problem is that both your cloak of resistance +5 and your muleback cords take up the "shoulders" slot. You can't be wearing both. If you lose the cloak, your saves all drop by 5. If you lose the cords, you are probably medium encumbered since you only have 5 Str; which means a -6 to your AC (since only a max +3 Dex is allowed).